ÆƵ– Posted May 18, 2014 Report Share Posted May 18, 2014 1. All leaderboard rules apply. 2. A critique of both cards must be given with each vote. 3. Cards are due within 72 hours of acceptance, votes go until 72 hours after cards are posted. 4. First to 3 Wins. Card requirements: Make a card that locks up monster card zones (E. G. Ojama King, Ojama Knight)Card A: Zoning Laws of the Underworld Continuous Spell One per turn, when the turn player Special Summons a DARK monster: they can target one unoccupied Monster Card Zone for each DARK monster they control; the targeted Zones cannot be used until their opponent's next Main Phase 2. Card B: Neither player can use Monster Card Zones in the same column as a used Spell/Trap Card Zone that they control. Destroy this card when all of your opponent's Monster Card Zones are occupied by monsters, or when your opponent has 5 cards in their Spell & Trap Card Zone.EDIT: DEADLINE HAS BEEN EXTENDED TO THE END OF THE MONTH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Dom- Posted May 18, 2014 Report Share Posted May 18, 2014 Sure, ill take you on, the requirement sounds cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ÆƵ– Posted May 18, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 18, 2014 Alright Cool. Send the card in when you're ready. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ÆƵ– Posted May 21, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 Cards are up, Lets get some votes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Excalibur the Divine Posted May 22, 2014 Report Share Posted May 22, 2014 Card A: Nice idea, but the dark attribute makes it a little weak. Selecting 2 attributes would be better. Card B: Nice idea also, but I noticed that it states "Neither player can use..." but then states " destroy this card when your opponent..." The first effect targets both players, but the second targets only the opponent. Was this done intentionally? I vote card B since it's maker may have made that effect on purpose. Even if it was an accident, I still would have voted card B. After this contest is over, can the maker of card B please tell me if that effect was an accident or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ÆƵ– Posted May 22, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 22, 2014 0-1 card B. Thanks for voting rtyui. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ÆƵ– Posted May 23, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 23, 2014 Bump because this was a really good prompt and I feel it needs recognition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Dom- Posted May 24, 2014 Report Share Posted May 24, 2014 bump because we need more votes before the deadline... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Excalibur the Divine Posted May 25, 2014 Report Share Posted May 25, 2014 bump because we need more voted before the deadline... Is there any way to extend the deadline because i Might end up being the only voter. Also, when it's the deadline can someone answer my question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armoire Posted May 25, 2014 Report Share Posted May 25, 2014 Card A: I find it to be a bit lackluster due to the fact that it requires a specific attribute and only locks down the Monster Card Zone until the opponent's Main Phase 2. Card B: I like it more, because it permanently locks your opponent down (prior to its own destruction) and its effect, relating to columns is very unique. So, I vote for Card B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Dom- Posted May 26, 2014 Report Share Posted May 26, 2014 0-2 card B, thanks for voting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ÆƵ– Posted May 27, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 27, 2014 Let's bump this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Dom- Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 last bump before the final deadline. Cmon people Im begging you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trebuchet MS Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 Card A is potentially problematic - a one-sided lingering zone lock, albeit temporary, can create problems. This is prevalent in a matchup consisting of a Deck that spams DARK monsters against a Deck that can't do so - more DARK monsters means more zone locks means fewer monsters for the opponent to retaliate with. Card B, on the other hand, is fairer in this regard, being symmetrical and non-lingering. Creates some interesting Senet interactions, but ultimately boils down to a different flavour of Spatial Collapse... maybe. Card wording implies that the zone locking is one-way, and it's entirely possible to summon your field full of monsters but still have the S/T zones available. Vote still goes to card B for instigating fewer unintended problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ÆƵ– Posted May 30, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 0-3 card B. Looks like ypu win this one, Empoledom. Gg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Dom- Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 Card A is potentially problematic - a one-sided lingering zone lock, albeit temporary, can create problems. This is prevalent in a matchup consisting of a Deck that spams DARK monsters against a Deck that can't do so - more DARK monsters means more zone locks means fewer monsters for the opponent to retaliate with. Card B, on the other hand, is fairer in this regard, being symmetrical and non-lingering. Creates some interesting Senet interactions, but ultimately boils down to a different flavour of Spatial Collapse... maybe. Card wording implies that the zone locking is one-way, and it's entirely possible to summon your field full of monsters but still have the S/T zones available. Vote still goes to card B for instigating fewer unintended problems. Huh, didn't see it that way. I was trying as hard as possible to include "Monster Card Zones" in the wording (contest requirement), but that has ended up being one-sided as you said, so I'll change it if/when I put it in RC. Card B: Nice idea also, but I noticed that it states "Neither player can use..." but then states " destroy this card when your opponent..." The first effect targets both players, but the second targets only the opponent. Was this done intentionally? I vote card B since it's maker may have made that effect on purpose. Even if it was an accident, I still would have voted card B. After this contest is over, can the maker of card B please tell me if that effect was an accident or not? The second effect didn't target both players as I thought the card would clearly be benefiting its user so the second effect applies to the opponent so he/she can stop it, but looking at it again, it looks like the second effect applying to both weakens it more. Again, I'll change it if I put it in RC. Anyways, thanks for the contest Aez, Gg! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.